… Because the NY Times reported yesterday that swing states are illegally dropping thousands of voters from the voter rolls, especially in states where Obama has made a large effort to register new voters.
Here’s the nut:
Tens of thousands of eligible voters in at least six swing states have been removed from the rolls or have been blocked from registering in ways that appear to violate federal law, according to a review of state records and Social Security data by The New York Times …
Although much attention this year has been focused on the millions of new voters being added to the rolls by the candidacy of Senator Barack Obama, there has been far less notice given to the number of voters being dropped from those same rolls.
States have been trying to follow the Help America Vote Act of 2002 and remove the names of voters who should no longer be listed; but for every voter added to the rolls in the past two months in some states, election officials have removed two, a review of the records shows.
This is especially true in Michigan, Colorado, Indiana, Nevada, North Carolina, and Ohio.
And speaking of Ohio, a NY Times editorial yesterday notes that Diebold electronic voting machines are dropping votes. Here’s the nut:
Election officials, who will have plenty on their minds on Nov. 4, have one more thing to worry about: Diebold electronic voting machines that drop votes. Ohio’s secretary of state raised the alarm after local officials reported problems with the March primary count. Diebold has since notified more than 30 states to be on the lookout for missing votes …
Computer scientists have shown that electronic voting machines are easy to hack. And voters report errors like vote flipping, in which the vote they cast for one candidate is recorded for another. Ohio’s secretary of state, Jennifer Brunner, is suing Diebold over the vote-dropping and noted that its machines crashed repeatedly during last year’s voting in Cuyahoga County.
Did I mention that Cuyahoga County is perhaps the key county in Ohio for Democrats to turn out Democrats?
And, while we’re at it, the Times reports this morning that the Obama campaigns has not been vetting its donors carefully enough. A small percentage of donations have come in from fictitious donors like “Test Person.” The Times, while noting there’s no evidence yet, raises the “ominous possibility” of fraud, “perhaps in order to donate beyond the maximum limits.”
Here’s the nut:
Even a contributor who used the name “Jgtj Jfggjjfgj,” and listed an address of “thjtrj” in “gjtjtjtjtjtjr, AP,” was able to contribute $370 in a series of $10 donations in August.
A pair of donors named “Derty West” and “Derty Poiiuy,” who listed “rewq, ME” as their addresses and “Qwertyyy” or “Qwerttyyu” as either their employer or occupation, contributed a combined $1,110 in July.
In some cases, campaign finance records showed refunds from the Obama campaign, presumably to donors’ credit cards, even as other contributions were accepted. Obama officials said most of their vetting occurred after a donation came in.
How long before we see the McCain campaigns titled “Derty West”? I’d be surprised if they didn’t have something out by lunch.
And speaking of those ads, in addition to mentioning Ayres at every stop, McCain-Palin is launching a new, national campaign linking Obama to Ayres. Here’s the nut, from ABC news:
New from the McCain campaign Friday: An ad that casually drops the L-word and touches on both Ayers to the economic distress, with Democrats portrayed as anti-regulation.
The ad:“Obama’s blind ambition. When convenient, he worked with terrorist Bill Ayers. When discovered, he lied. Obama. Blind ambition. Bad judgment. Congressional liberals fought for risky sub-prime loans. Congressional liberals fought against more regulation. Then, the housing market collapsed, costing you billions. In crisis, we need leadership, not bad judgment.”
This, from the candidate who once said: “I pledge again a respectful campaign. A respectful campaign based on the issues and based on the stark differences we have on the vision for the future of America.”
And Carville thinks this election is over?
thing is, the ridiculous bullshizzz we’re all bracing for is going to be perceived as desperation on the part of McWhatever. i mean, the rallies are getting angrier and angrier, moving further and further from the issues and the things that would, i don’t know, actually win voters.
so now there’s a few thousand hardcores screaming epithets, flicking off the media bus, and yelling “you’re hot” to palin. that’s good for obizzle because the centrist voters that will decide the election are less likely to get swept up in this extremely negative vitriol.
I agree with Ben and I think it is illustrated by a conversation that I had with a couple of members of the IUPAT (International Union of Painters and Allied Trades) at Thursday’s rally. They (and two other IUPAT members) had come from Columbus and were going to be attending each of Obama’s rallies Thursday and Friday. They’d been to Dayton for his last rally and said there had been very large numbers of anti-Obama protesters lining the right field fence that separates the street from the stadium and on the street in which rally participants lined up. They were shocked that there was absolutely no showing from any Bush III supporters this time. While we can’t be sure of the reason it certainly suggests a lack of spirit on their side.
One final note, David Brooks, in an interview with The Atlantic’s Jeffrey Goldberg said Sarah Palin “represents a fatal cancer to the Republican party” and that “she is ‘absolutely not’ ready to be president or vice president. He also decries the anti-intellectual posture she represents. I applaud his honesty and agree with his position on this.
Ben –
I hope you’re right — and I hope it’s only a few thousand hardcores. There’s no question is desparation — the ugliest kind. I just worry that when you start to whip up this kind of stuff, it’s hard to get back in the bottle.
DrDad –
I saw that incredible David Brooks interview. He’s been blasting Obama for roughly 2 months now (after initially supporting him). It’s nice to see that he does have a conscience — and that he’s speaking publicly. We now have de facto endorsements for Obama from conservative stalwarts Brooks and George Will.
For those who haven’t seen the Brooks comments, watch it here:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/08/david-brooks-sarah-palin_n_133001.html
-ND
Dropping voters – Have you seen how some ballots have been printed in the stat of New York – Barack Osama. How will that play.
Poll watchers need to record every last voter’s name as is the right of a poll watcher….the name of the voter is said aloud if the poll watchers want to hear it. Poll watchers must keep a list of every voter in every ward; district or precinct. That voter list may be the only way to count votes to check the machines.
Then, outside the voting place doors and the correct number of feet away from said doors, station a democrat who then will ask each person if they will tell how they voted as a back-up to the machines.
Keep count of the voters voting inside and their names, and of the verbal votes most people will share as they leave the poll….it will give some proof should the machines need to be challenged.
And be there in the polling place when they read the count on the machine before the first vote and after the poll closes. And know the numberof voters who voted on your machine all day long….this number is vital!!!! If there is a discrepancy at the moment they close the machine close the place down legally and call in the election commission. Do not leave your machine!
….advice from a veteran poll watcher
Josh: As always, great posts!